Reader takes issue with columnist’s view

February 15, 2013

I normally ignore (Connie) Schultz's viewpoint piece in the paper, because in my opinion it is filled with half-truths and its goal is to further her agenda and her husband's political career. Due to the tile "just like you" I read it. I grew up with a similar family background. I have family members that run the gamut from conservative to liberal. I believe that women should have equal pay for equal work. I believe that people should not be persecuted for their beliefs or lifestyles as long as they don't harm others or break the law. Most people value safety, voting rights, immigration reform, grandchildren, pets, etc. We are all people after all, it's rare that you can't find some common ground with anyone Her suggestion that "liberals" are the only ones that do care about the above issues and that Obama's opinion is that only one that is correct is insulting, in my opinion.

She goes on to gush about the president's inaugural speech. She, like the president and most good con artists from either extreme, fill their writings and speeches with half-truths that are good sound bites that cannot be refuted with simple answers, but would need in depth rational discussion.

She and others like her try to blame responsible gun owners for the recent shootings. They will not accept responsibility that it is their efforts that allowed violent, mentally disturbed people to choose not to have follow-ups nor take their medicines; yet they cannot be jailed or institutionalized. Yet hardworking people who have contributed to society cannot be trusted in their eyes.

People like her claim they will pay for all their projects by taxing the rich, only those making over $250,000. If that's true how come I make less than that but pay almost 50 percent of my earnings to the local, state, and federal government through various taxes, and the government already spends 40 percent more than it takes in?

When Ed Koch was pressed about why he was making cuts to balance the budget, he was quoted as saying I'm a liberal, not a wacko. I would suggest the wacko label should apply to members of both parties generally the ones in positions of control.

So I feel that I'm much different than Schultz. I don't think her labels are accurate, I consider myself a moderate, but since I favor personal and financial responsibility with limited taxation and government powers, I'm called a conservative by her kind.

I have self-proclaimed liberal friends and relatives, most of the time we try to have discussions and try to understand and influence the other persons point of view, not belittle, demean, and question the others persons morals and intelligence if we disagree. In my opinion they're not like her either.